WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

User avatar
Fel
Weavespinner
Posts: 2004
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2003 6:04 pm

WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by Fel »

Well, it looks like Obama's pretty much well wrapped it up.

Now that it's over, I can admit that I voted for him, generally out of protest. It wasn't because I really think he'll be a good POTUS (President Of The United States), but because I thought McCain would be a disaster because he had the utter insanity to choose Sarah Palin as his running mate.

And there was no way in Hell I was voting for even the REMOTE chance that Caribou Barbie (Sarah Palin) would ever be President. McCain is old, and if he croaked in office, Palin would have been an absolute catastrophe as I-can't-do-this-job In Chief.

Is it because she's a woman? No. I felt Clinton was qualified to be POTUS, though my Democratic candidate was Bill Richardson. It's because she interviewed like a deer in your headlights, she was a disaster in the debate, and she reminded me of Dan Quayle. And God, would I love to forget all about Dan Quayle.

When it came to my Senate and House votes, I threw them away. I was furious with Senator Rockefeller and Representative Rahall voting for the 700 BILLION dollar bailout, so I voted for their Republican opponents out of spite. Not that it mattered, they both won anyway.

Doesn't it suck when you find yourself voting for the lesser of two evils for POTUS election after election?
Just another guy from the shallow end of the gene pool.
boballab
Sui'Kun
Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:41 pm
Location: Ocean City Maryland

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by boballab »

Personally I don't believe Obama has a clue on how to run the country but that's my opion, however I wish him the best if he wins which he has a good shot at taking Cali into account. The reason for that is there is many things that whoever the Pres is doesn't have control over but takes it in the shorts for anyway. With both houses in Democrat hands and him in the white house and if those things go bad, he would unfairly take a beating for it. It actually would have been politically better for him if one of the houses went Republican and those things tanked on him.
The Mizriath Jihad is on hold.....for the moment
User avatar
dellstart
Child of Niami
Posts: 1062
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: The Holy SCG

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by dellstart »

boballab wrote:Personally I don't believe Obama has a clue on how to run the country but that's my opion, however I wish him the best if he wins which he has a good shot at taking Cali into account. The reason for that is there is many things that whoever the Pres is doesn't have control over but takes it in the shorts for anyway. With both houses in Democrat hands and him in the white house and if those things go bad, he would unfairly take a beating for it. It actually would have been politically better for him if one of the houses went Republican and those things tanked on him.
Well, I wouldn't have voted for him (for the above reason) , but a President lives and dies on the economy.Proven fact, just look at any past presidency and nine out of ten times , they get booted for the weak economy.No one looks at a previous president set the ball rolling (Esp if he was a Democrat), it s all on the president now to fix it up.
Then again the Messiah , who has promised all things to all people through out his campaign , better start coughing up with the goods.
User avatar
Mysterious
Sorcerer
Posts: 67
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 2:05 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by Mysterious »

Congrats on the win for Barack.

I hope he can dig the US out of the disaster that is their economy because if he can't we'll be going: "Well today's a lucky day... We have some meat on the table" and what will happen in the developing or third world... lets not contemplate that right now.

Rome is crumbling and the Dark Age is upon us.

IF he can slow it down or stop it cold I personally will consider him as a successful President. Asking for more, I believe will be foolhardy.




Mysterious
You're not FAT... You're just horizontally gifted :)
User avatar
Mizriath
Leaders of the Off-Topic
Posts: 713
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 1:14 am
Location: A city they actually abbreviate to SIN

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by Mizriath »

Congrats on Obama,

And hopefully he can do something.

Honestly in my opinion, since this is already a global recession, and based on histories, once companies start going bust which is starting, it weeds out some competition and to a point where the strongest companies and banks can survive, with the citizen able to start paying for commodities, then the economy will start to recover worldwide.

I laughed when Asia said that the China or India will able to absorb the shock and move the world forward. This economies itself depends on the US consumer. So they are now experiencing the shocks which the US has gone through and it has not stopped until the US consumer can get by and spend on what they have. The word is how far down the other parts of the world economies will drop until the whole cycle and contagion finish. There are other economies out there that depends on China and India. They will also have to suffer. No economy is an island by itself.

To me the world economy should not have too wide income disparity, maximum 50% income disparity for the same job worldwide. Then it will be a matter of efficient producers and tax breaks but the workers will act as consumers being able to consume the world goods. I only believe it will start in 2010 before the economy is really on the mend. In the coming months, it is a matter which companies can be strong enough to survive, especially companies with low debts.

I am just bracing for the fall out and well scrimping and saving pennies.
The sea flows as long as Earth exist, Love is alive as long as people exist. I will read Fel's stories as long as my heart still beats.
boballab
Sui'Kun
Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:41 pm
Location: Ocean City Maryland

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by boballab »

The economy is one of those areas where the Pres. has little to no direct influence over, but takes it in the shorts for if anything "bad" happens. The Fed chairman has more influence and he is totally autonomous from the oval office, the stock market is not controlled by the white house, same with real estate. If the economy (which Obama will have no effect on in the next year) tanks and even one terrorist attack or international crises gets out of hand with in the next year the Republicans will be handed a big club to beat him over the head with because they have no influence in either house. Thats why I like it when neither party controls both the congress and the white house, it gives the Pres a little necessary political manuvering room to get things done.
The Mizriath Jihad is on hold.....for the moment
User avatar
dellstart
Child of Niami
Posts: 1062
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: The Holy SCG

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by dellstart »

Found this on a blog. Good point.


Oh dear ! I remember when people went around cheering, clapping and practically swooning with delight when the Blair messiah was elected on little more than a broad grin and promises of "change|". They aren`t cheering now ! They do say that history repeats itself.

Dan Roman, , UK
User avatar
GBLW
Mi'Shara
Posts: 615
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:31 am

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by GBLW »

Unfortunately Obama made many more campaign promises than the economy and world affairs will allow him to keep, at least that's my opinion. In other words, he gave the US voter a snow-job to get into office, but after four years, his record in the white house may well be called "the reign of the Obamanable snowman." :twisted: :wink:
K Pelle aka GBLW
My recent stories are available at: http://www.grynenbayritpublications.com/
J-Man5
Mi'Shara
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 10:36 pm

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by J-Man5 »

Hurray!!!! One of the two puppets/snakes was elected. This way the men in the back rooms can get back to work directing their little black ops. We have chosen another puppet!!!!! Yay!!! Back to normal!!!! Any notice that politics and major sports are all controlled and decided months in advance so that big business and those who really control things will get more power/money and things really stay the same no matter what the promises are. Yes I do believe in conspiracy! It's a strong part of the human race and is not easily removed. I dare you to disprove it wasn't decided months ago.

J-Man5
User avatar
MrNerdHair
Novice
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:30 am

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by MrNerdHair »

J-Man5 wrote:I dare you to disprove it wasn't decided months ago.
I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but PLEASE don't use that argument. It is impossible to prove something by proving it can't be disproven. It is impossible to disprove that Obama isn't an outer space alien using his advanced technology to fool us into thinking he'd be a good president, but that doesn't mean he's a surgically-altered green-headed man with an automatic alienspeak-to-english translator. It is really hard to disprove that landing on the moon wasn't a giant conspiracy too... if only because of the prohibitive cost of sending another rocket up to find out if the flag is still there.

So, please don't use this argument. If you'd like to postulate that the US electoral system isn't very democratic because the two choices we have seem to be pre-picked and groomed by big business and the combination of the electoral college system and the winner-take-all state laws ensure that voting for a third-party candidate is essentially the same as throwing your vote away, go ahead... but the onus is on you to present evidence for your point, not on someone else to produce evidence against it.
User avatar
dellstart
Child of Niami
Posts: 1062
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: The Holy SCG

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by dellstart »

MrNerdHair wrote:
J-Man5 wrote:I dare you to disprove it wasn't decided months ago.
I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but PLEASE don't use that argument. It is impossible to prove something by proving it can't be disproven. It is impossible to disprove that Obama isn't an outer space alien using his advanced technology to fool us into thinking he'd be a good president, but that doesn't mean he's a surgically-altered green-headed man with an automatic alienspeak-to-english translator. It is really hard to disprove that landing on the moon wasn't a giant conspiracy too... if only because of the prohibitive cost of sending another rocket up to find out if the flag is still there.

So, please don't use this argument. If you'd like to postulate that the US electoral system isn't very democratic because the two choices we have seem to be pre-picked and groomed by big business and the combination of the electoral college system and the winner-take-all state laws ensure that voting for a third-party candidate is essentially the same as throwing your vote away, go ahead... but the onus is on you to present evidence for your point, not on someone else to produce evidence against it.

Excuse my Ignorance , but what do we need the popular vote for , if every thing decided by the Electoral collage?

I assume the reason for the whole electoral collage in the first place , was to give fair representation to the smaller states , who's rights might have overshadowed the larger states with larger populations.leveling the playing field as it were.So if everything is decided by the chosen Elector choosing on our behalf,then whats is the need for the popular vote?
Plus in a situation , where the collage is one one and the popular vote is another way , why do we follow the colleges view?
User avatar
Fel
Weavespinner
Posts: 2004
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2003 6:04 pm

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by Fel »

The Electoral College was originally put in place literally, and I'm not joking here, because our founding fathers feared giving the common man the ability to elect a president. They wanted the president elected by men of wealth and education, men like themselves, who would be wise enough to choose a good president.

Originally, the Electors of the college were chosen by the state legislatures, and they were not bound to vote in any way. They elected the president among themselves. Since the state legislators were elected by popular vote, the founding fathers felt that that was "democratic enough," for the men who chose the electors were themselves elected officials.

In the 19th century somewhere, or maybe the early 20th, not entire sure, the college was changed by tying a state's electors to be forced to cast their votes for whichever candidate won the popular vote in that state.

The electoral college won't go away, I'm afraid, because it would take a constitutional amendment to abolish it, and the small states would never pass it. They get too much advantage out of the electoral college to give it up.
Just another guy from the shallow end of the gene pool.
User avatar
Hearly
Speed Racer!
Posts: 1077
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:06 am

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by Hearly »

Fel wrote:The Electoral College was originally put in place literally, and I'm not joking here, because our founding fathers feared giving the common man the ability to elect a president. They wanted the president elected by men of wealth and education, men like themselves, who would be wise enough to choose a good president.

Originally, the Electors of the college were chosen by the state legislatures, and they were not bound to vote in any way. They elected the president among themselves. Since the state legislators were elected by popular vote, the founding fathers felt that that was "democratic enough," for the men who chose the electors were themselves elected officials.

In the 19th century somewhere, or maybe the early 20th, not entire sure, the college was changed by tying a state's electors to be forced to cast their votes for whichever candidate won the popular vote in that state.

The electoral college won't go away, I'm afraid, because it would take a constitutional amendment to abolish it, and the small states would never pass it. They get too much advantage out of the electoral college to give it up.
True but in the same breath, I'd wish they'd modify it a bit to be more Fair.



My Idea would be to base it on the percentage, so if Mccain would have gotten lets say 40% of a vote of a state and Obama got 60, then the College votes would be split 40/60 and not winner take all.
User avatar
dellstart
Child of Niami
Posts: 1062
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: The Holy SCG

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by dellstart »

Fel wrote:The Electoral College was originally put in place literally, and I'm not joking here, because our founding fathers feared giving the common man the ability to elect a president. They wanted the president elected by men of wealth and education, men like themselves, who would be wise enough to choose a good president.

Originally, the Electors of the college were chosen by the state legislatures, and they were not bound to vote in any way. They elected the president among themselves. Since the state legislators were elected by popular vote, the founding fathers felt that that was "democratic enough," for the men who chose the electors were themselves elected officials.

In the 19th century somewhere, or maybe the early 20th, not entire sure, the college was changed by tying a state's electors to be forced to cast their votes for whichever candidate won the popular vote in that state.

The electoral college won't go away, I'm afraid, because it would take a constitutional amendment to abolish it, and the small states would never pass it. They get too much advantage out of the electoral college to give it up.

Thanks Fel.

Even though I live here, I wasn't brought up with this system of Government. Its good to know ,that when I can vote, my vote will not mean too much , cause I live in good old Democratic NYC.The chances of a Republican winning here are like a snow ball's in hell.

Its funny , how history doesn't change and we have always had these so called enlightened men of superior education and upbringing , who think tthye are superior to the the Joe Plumbers of the world.
boballab
Sui'Kun
Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:41 pm
Location: Ocean City Maryland

Re: WARNING! POLITICS OFF THE PORT BOW!

Post by boballab »

Hearly actually two states do it that already: Maine and Nebraska.
The Constitution allows each state legislature to designate a method of choosing electors. Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have adopted a winner-take-all popular vote rule where voters choose between statewide slates of electors pledged to vote for a specific presidential and vice presidential candidate. The candidate that wins the most votes in the state wins the support of all of that state’s electors. The two other states, Maine and Nebraska, use a tiered system where a single elector is chosen within each Congressional district and two electors are chosen by statewide popular vote. U.S. presidential elections are effectively an amalgamation of 51 separate and simultaneous elections (50 states plus the District of Columbia), rather than a single national election.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Electoral_College

So you try to change your state at that level with out a constitutional amendement. Reading that little tidbit I think I prefer the tiered method. I know of some places where a city has too much effect over a states electoral vote then should be allowed. Examples are NYC, Philadelphia/Pittsburgh and Denver. Due to the population density of those cities compared to the rest of their states, the canidates can ignore the rest of the state and only campaign in the cities. In Pennsylvania all you have to do is win Philly, split Pittsburgh and you win the state. That leaves the rest of the people of the state out in the cold.
The Mizriath Jihad is on hold.....for the moment
Locked